4 ms·
> Full stop. Why people don't edit out obvious sloppification and expect to still have readers left
by 100ms 5mo ago
> Full stop.
Why people don't edit out obvious sloppification and expect to still have readers left
- cbg0 5mo agoSo are we saying it's fine that the article is written by an LLM as long as it doesn't have the tell-tale signs of LLMs?
- ramon156 5mo agoIt's more about curating the things you're publishing. Why would I bother reading what you couldn't bother to read?
- alienbaby 5mo agoThey could easily have read it, and thought , that communicates the information that it needs to. No point creating busywork for yourself just shuffling words around when the information is there, no? I guess it depends on what you want out of the article. Substance, or style?
- lelanthran 5mo ago> They could easily have read it, and thought , that communicates the information that it needs to. I'd they aren't self-aware enough or smart enough to determine that what they wrote is indistinguishable from text generation, how probable is it that they have something of value to add to any thought?
- 100ms 5mo agoI don't really see reason to complain about tool use, so long as the result is cohesive, accurate and that ultimately means a human has at least read their own output before publishing. It's a bit like receiving a supposedly personal letter that starts "Dear [INSERT_FIRST_NAME_FIELD]," are you really going to read such a thing?
- HighGoldstein 5mo agoAn article without telltale signs of an LLM is indistinguishable from an article written by a human, so yes.
- spicyusername 5mo agoMy opinion is that literature and art will continue pushing the envelope in the places they always pushed the envelope. LLMs will not change this, humans love making art, and they love doing it in new ways. Corporate announcements were never the places that literature and art were pushing the envelope. They were slop before, and they're slop now.
- wewewedxfgdf 5mo agoThird line in to the article: "But there’s one result in the benchmarks I keep coming back to." I hear this sort of thing all the time now on YouTube from media/news personalities: “And that’s the part nobody seems to be talking about.” "And here's what keeps me up at night." “This is where the story gets complicated.” “Here’s the piece that doesn’t quite fit.” “And this is where the usual explanation starts to break down.” “Here’s what I can’t stop thinking about.” “The part that should worry us is not the obvious one.” “And that’s where the real problem begins.” “But the more interesting question is the one no one is asking.” “And this is where things stop being simple.” It doesn't really worry me but I think its interesting that LLM speak sounds so distinctive, and how willing these media personalities are to be so obvious in reading out on TV what the LLM spat out. I've never studied what LLMs say in depth is it is interesting that my brain recognises the speech pattern so easily.
- bambax 5mo agoI notice this very often in LinkedIn posts, and it's annoying, but I had not realized it was LLM-speak? Isn't it possible that people write like this naturally?
- trvz 5mo agoYes. Some people are very trigger happy in attributing human slop to LLMs.
- spicyusername 5mo agoArguably it's exactly because it was used naturally so often that the LLMs parrot it so frequently.
- wewewedxfgdf 5mo agoI think LLM's have that sort of "summarise, wrap it in a bow tie, give a little dramatic punch as a preview to the next few points".
- cyanydeez 5mo ago
- crunis 5mo agoAre you referring to the literal use of the expression "full stop"? I don't see it anymore in the article, maybe they edited it out?